TX 
S4 


UC-NRLF 


llllilllllllllllllllliiillllllllllilllililjj 


r 


&xs^-<^^^ 


10 


I 


1 


V*'?'*^''-^'    ^ 


The  Adequacy  and  Economy 
of  Some  City  Dietaries 


The  Adequacy  and  Economy  of 
Some  City  Dietaries 


By 
H.   C.    SHERMAN 

Columbia  University 
and 

L.  H.  GILLETT 

New  Yorlc  Association  for  Improving 
the  Condition  of  tlie  Poor 


This  study  and  Us  publication  are  made  possible  by 

the  Department  of  Social  Welfare  established 

by  Mrs.  Elizabeth  Milbank  Anderson 


BUREAU  OF  FOOD  SUPPLY 

The  New  York  Association  for  Improving  the  Condition  of  the  Poor 


NEW  YORK 
1917 

Publication  No.  121 


f 


Copyright,  1917,  by 
The  New  York  Association  kor  Improving  the  Condition  of  the  Poor 

CorneliuH  N.  Bliss,  Jr.,  President 
George  Blagden,  Treasurer 
Franklin  B.  Kirkbride,  Secretary 
Bailey  B.  Burritt,  General  Director 


The  Association  and  authors  wish  to  thank  those  who  hare 
in  any  way  assisted  in  this  work.  They  wish  especially  to 
thajik  Dr.  A.  W.  Thomas,  of  Columbia  University,  arid 
Dr.  Mary  Rose,  of  Teachers  Cnllege,  for  the  readifuj  of  the 
manuscript. 


PRINTED    BY 

EATON    &   GETTINGER 

263    NINTH    AVE. 

NEW   YORK 


A  Study  of  the  Adequacy  and  Economy  of 
Some  City  Dietaries 


Since  nearly  half  of  the  income  of  the  majority  of  families  is  spent  in  the 
purchasing  of  food  supplies,  and  since  food  is  such  an  important  factor  in  the 
welfare  of  the  family,  it  is  important  both  economically  and  physiologically 
that  expenditure  for  food  be  made  in  such  a  way  as  will  give  the  best  returns 
for  the  money  spent. 

Any  suggestions,  however,  as  to  how  to  improve  upon  present  food  habits 
should  be  based  on  a  knowledge  of  the  adequacy  of  present  family  dietaries 
and  the  relation  existing  between  nutritive  value  and  the  different  types  of  food. 

To  this  end,  102  family  dietaries  have  been  carefully  collected  and  analyzed, 
each  dietary  being  an  exact  record  of  the  amount  and  cost  of  the  food  eaten 
by  a  family  for  a  period  of  seven  days  during  1914-1915. 

The  records  were  secured  in  three  ways.  Two-thirds  of  them  were  collected 
by  the  investigator  who  reached  the  families  through  settlements,  mothers' 
clubs,  health  centers,  and  schools.  She  made  daily  visits,  sometimes  two  visits 
daily,  to  the  homes  of  the  families,  weighed  the  food,  and  supervised  very 
closely  the  keeping  of  the  records.  Some  studies  were  made  by  women  who 
were  interested  and  intelligent  enough  to  keep  an  accurate  record  under  the 
general  direction  of  the  investigator  but  without  detailed  supervision.  The 
remaining  studies  were  obtained  through  teachers  of  Home  Economics  who 
incorporated  the  keeping  of  the  record  into  a  lesson  in  household  accounts  or 
dietetics.  Only  such  of  these  records  were  used  as  gave  every  evidence  of 
accuracy  as  shown  by  the  data  of  the  record  itself,  the  reputation  of  the  girl, 
and  the  opinion  of  the  teacher. 

Of  the  102  studies,  87  were  made  in  New  York  City,  9  in  Clevelaivl  OliJn. 
5  in  Long  Beach,  California,  and  i  in  Stamford,  Connecticut. 

Among  these  102  families  there  were  10  which,  as  supervised  pensioners  m 
the  New  York  Association  for  Improving  the  Condition  of  the  Poor,  had  been 
so  influenced  by  a  dietitian  that  they  showed  food  habits  which  could  hardly 
be  taken  as  typical.  The  results  of  these  10  studies  were  not  included  in  the 
general  averages. 

In  the  92  remaining  families  from  which  the  general  averages  have  been 
made  there  were  343  children  and  287  adults,  or  3.7  children  and  3.1  adults 
per  family.  As  to  nationality  they  were  divided  as  follows:  2^  Irish,  20 
Americans,  17  Hebrews,  13  Germans,  10  Italians,  5  Scotch,  and  4  of  mixed 
races.  The  studies  were  quite  equally  distributed  as  to  the  season  of  the  year,' 
46  having  been  collected  during  October,  November,  and  December  in  1914 
and  January,  February,  and  March  in  1915,  and  46  during  the  months  of 
April,  May,  June,  July,  August,,  and  September  in  1915. 

3 

389420 


The  averaoe  cosl  per  rtiLtn  per  da)-  was  32.9  cents,  with  a  range  from  11.2 
cents  to  76.0  cents.     The  distribution  according  to  cost  per  man  per  day 

Chart  I      ^2  Family  Dietaries.  (I914-I915) 

Dislri  bution  as  to  Cost  per  Man  per  Day 


11-15   16-20  21-25  26-30  31-35  36-40  IMS  -46-50  51-55  5fr60  Sl-65  66-70  71-75  ?S-eo 

Cost  per  Man  per  Day_  Cen  is 

(Chart  I)  shows  the  greatest  frequency  from  25  to  35  cents,  with  approximately 
one-fourth  spending  less  than  25  cents  and  one-fourth  more  than  40  cents. 

These  divisions  as  to  nationality,  season  of  the  year,  cost  and  make-up 
of  the  family  seemed  to  us  to  be  fairly  representative  of  social  groups  and  well 
suited  to  our  purpose. 

Each  dietary  was  analyzed  to  determine  cost  per  man  per  day  and  the 
distribution  of  this  food  expenditure  among  the  various  types  of  food  such  as 
meat  and  fish,  eggs,  cheese,  milk,  cream,  butter,  and  other  fats,  grain  products, 
sugar,  vegetables,  fruits,  nuts  and  a  miscellaneous  group  including  tea,  coffee, 
spices,  yeast,  vinegar,  etc.  In  each  case  the  food  value  was  calculated  in  terms 
of  calories,  protein,  phosphorus,  calcium  (lime),  and  iron  per  man  per  day. 
Where  necessary  this  work  was  supplemented  by  laboratory  analyses  to  deter- 
mine the  composition  of  the  food.  Calories  and  protein  were  quite  generally 
assumed  from  standard  tables,*  but  much  ash  analysis  was  necessary  where 
there  had  not  been  sufficient  work  done  to  establish  an  average,  t 

*  Those  contained  in  Rose's  Laboratory  Hand  book   for  Dietetics  were  chiefly  used  for 

calories  and  protein, 
t  For  analyses  done  in  connection  with  this  study  see  Table  VI,  page  30  of  the  appendix. 


On  the  basis  of  these  results  the  studies  have  been  classified,  averaged, 
and  examined,  to  trace  relationships  between  .the  different  types  of  food  and 
the  resulting  food  value,  and  to  determine  the  adequacy  of  the  ordinary  diet 
in  so  far  as  the  five  factors  mentioned  above  are  concerned. 

In  considering  the  adequacy  of  the  various  food  factors,  it  is  obviously 
necessary  to  have  some  basis  for  judgment  as  to  what  is  adequate  for  proper 
nutrition. 

Since  considerable  work  has  been  done  to  determine  the  energy  require- 
ment, a  standard  allowance  for  this  factor  is  quite  commonly  agreed  upon  as 
3400-3,500  calories  for  a  man  working  moderately  hard,  and  that  is  the  basis 
of  the  allowance  used  in  this  study. 

A  review  of  the  work  done  on  protein  metabolism  indicated  that  in  about 
100  experiments  which  seemed  of  such  a  character  as  to  throw  light  on  this 
question,  the  average  protein  requirement  was  approximately  50  grams  pef 
man  per  day.  If  this  be  increased  by  50  per  cent  ''for  safety,"  one  obtains 
a  standard  allow^ance  of  75  grams  of  protein  per  man  per  day. 

Since  very  little  work  had  been  done  on  the  phosphorus  and^ralcium 
requirement,  however,  it  was  thought  advisable  to  investigate  these  factors 
by  means  of  laboratory  experiments,  and  thus  get  more  reliable  information 
than  was  available.  Five  metabolism  experiments  of  a  month  each  were 
performed  on  healthy  individuals,  and  upon  these  results  in  connection  with 
what  had  previously  been  done  an  adequate  allowance  for  each  was  estimated 
according  to  the  plan  used  in  estimating  the  allowance  for  protein. 

No  revision  of  the  iron  figures  was  made. 

The  results  of  the  dietaries  were  interpreted  in  the  light  of  these  allowances, 
which  in  view  of  all  available  evidence  were  judged  as  best  expressing  the 
requirements  of  human  nutrition. 

Many  of  the  studies  gave  evidence  of  deficiencies  in  food  value  in  one  or 
more  important  aspects.  These  deficiencies  occurred  frequently  where  the 
amount  of  money  spent  for  food  was  adequate  to  supply  sufficient  nourishment 
had  it  been  spent  wisely.  Or  in  some  cases,  the  amount  of  food  consumed 
was  such  as  to  give  nearly  40  per  cent  more  energy  than  was  probably  needed, 
while  the  amount  of  calcium  (lime)  or  iron  was  barely  more  than  enough  to 
provide  for  the  needs  of  the  body.  The  selection  of  food  was  such  that  had 
these  families  been  getting  energy  at  the  rate  of  3,500  calories  per  man,  in 
many  instances  some  of  the  important  ash  constituents  would  have  been  below 
the  standard  allowance. 

The  first  classification  of  the  dietaries  was  on  the  basis  of  cost.  The  92 
studies  were  arranged  in  the  order  of  cost,  and  averaged  in  four  groups  of  2^ 
each  *  In  Group  I  were  the  dietaries  of  the  23  families  sptindmg  the  least 
amount  for  food  and  Group  IV  contained  those  spending  the  largest  amount. 

Table  I  gives  for  each  group  the  average  cost  and  food  value  with  a  state- 
ment of  the  allowance  used  as  a  basis  for  judging  the  adequacy  of  the  food 

value. 

♦All  figures  will  be  given  on  the  "per  man  per  day"  basis. 


Table  1.      92  Dietaries — Averaged  in  four  groups   according   to  cost. 
Average  food  value  per  man  per  day  of  each  group 


Group 

Cost 

Calories 

Protein 

Phosphorus 

Calcium 

Iron 

Cents 

Grams 

Grams 

Grams 

Milligrams 

I 

19.2 

2043 

78 

1.14 

0.51 

12.1 

n 

28.2 

2665 

91 

1.39 

0.64 

14.9 

III 

34.7 

3106 

109 

1.60 

0.72 

17.7 

IV 

49.4 

3889 

126 

1.95 

1.01 

20.6 

Standard  Al- 

_  lowance 

2500-3500 

75 

1.44 

0.69    • 

15.0 

Comparing  these  averages  with  the  standard  allowance  given,  it  would 
seem  as  though  energy  and  calcium  were  the  factors  most  often  deficient. 
This  assumption  is  strengthened  by  the  summary  given  in  Table  2  of  the 
number  and  percentage  of  dietaries  above  and  below  what  is  considered  a  safe 
allowance.  By  these  figures  we  see  that  nearly  59  per  cent  of  the  families 
were  getting  below  the  ordinary  accepted  standard  of  3,000  calories  and  that 
76  per  cent  were  below  3,500  calories  per  man  per  day,  the  amount  upon  which 
children's  requirements  have  ordinarily  been  based. 


Table   2.     Number   and    percentage    of    dietaries    distributed   as    to 
calories,  protein,  phosphorus,  calcium,  and  iron 


CALORIES               PROTEIN 

PHOSPHORUS 

CALCIUM 

IRON 

' 

Grams 

Grams 

Grams 

Milligrams 

d-? 

Below  2000 

11 

2000-2500 

22 

Below  50 

0 

Below  0.96 

5 

Below  0.45 

13 

Below  10 

5 

2500-3000 
3000-3500 

21 
16 

50-75 
75-Above 

12 

80 

0.96-1.44 
1.44- Above 

40 
47 

0.45-0.68 
0.68-Above 

36 
43 

10-15 
15- Above 

33 
54 

3500-Above 

22 

CALORIES 

PROTEIN 

PHOSPHORUS 

CALCIUM 

IRON 

Grams 

^8 

Grams 

^1 

Grams 

Milligrams 

S3  c 

Below 
2500 
3000 

35.9 
58.7 

Below 
50 

75 

0.0 
13.0 

Below 
0.96 
1.44 

5.4 
48.9 

Below 
0.45 
0.68 

14.1 
53.2 

Below 
10 

15 

5.4 
41.3 

3500 

76.1 

100 

51.0 

There  seems  to  be  little  danger  of  protein  deficiency,  indicating  that  the 
money  spent  for  food  has  been  spent  in  such  a  way  as  to  supply  relatiyely  high 
protein  at  a  sacrifice  to  the  energy.  As  regards  the  probable  comparative 
danger  of  insufficient  energy  and  protein,  only  12  families  were  getting  less 
than  75  grams  of  protein  as  against  54  getting  less  than  3,000  calories,  while 
none  were  getting  less  than  50  grams  of  protein,  but  33  were  getting  less  than 
2,500  calories.  Since  an  adequate  supply  of  energy  is  essential  both  to  healthy 
growth  and  activity,  and  to  the  proper  protection  of  body  tissue,  the  frequent 
deficiency  of  energy  value  in  these  city  dietaries  must  be  regarded  as  an  im- 
portant factor  in  causing  the  large  amount  of  malnutrition  reported  amo  ig 
school  children. 

Had  the  energy  been  3,000  calories  in  each  case,  the  cause  for  concern  re- 
garding the  other  food  factors  would  have  been  much  less,  as  shown  in  Table  3. 


Table  3.       92  Dietaries  distributed  as  to  food  value  on  the  basis  of 

3,000  calories 


PROTEIN 

PHOSPHORUS 

CALCIUM 

IRON 

^ 

t^ 

^ 

«-> 

0 

c 

a; 

c 

<u 

G 

0 

c 

Grams 

Grams 

^ 
f 

a 

Grams 

t5 

Milligrams 

^ 

0 

3 

Im 

i-i 

3 

u 

3 

1^ 

Z 

^ 

^ 

1) 

0^ 

^ 

a; 

"Z 

^ 

Below  50 

0 

0.0 

Below  0.96 

0 

0.0 

Below  0.45 

4 

4.4 

Below  10 

0 

0.0 

Below  62 

1 

1.1 

Below  1.20 

4 

4.4 

Below  0.57 

17 

18.5 

Below  12.5 

3 

3.3 

Below  75 

2 

2.2 

Below  1.44 

28 

30.5 

Below  0.68 

37 

40.2 

Below  15.0 

18 

19.6 

Below  100 

36 

39.2 

Above  1.44 

64 

69.5 

Above  0.68 

55 

59.8 

Above  15.0 

74 

80.4 

Above  100 

56 

60.8 

In  only  2  cases  was  there  less  than  75  grams  of  protein  at  3,000  calories,  while 
40  per  cent  of  the  families  were  getting  less  than  the  standard  allowance  of 
calcium,  30  per  cent  less  than  the  standard  allowance  of  phosphorus,  and  19 
per  cent  less  than  that  of  iron.  Next  to  energy,  then,  calcium  deficiency  seems 
to  offer  the  largest  problem.  The  importance  of  calcium  deficiency  must  not 
be  overlooked  even  though  one  may  not  be  able  to  point  to  clinical  symptoms. 
Professor  Mendel  of  Yale  says  of  his  recent  nutrition  experiments  that  "animals 
may  be  in  excellent  nutritive  condition  in  so  far  as  protein  is  concerned  for  long 
periods  of  time  while  they  are  still  losing  calcium  from  their  bones.  It  then 
happens  that  suddenly  a  collapse  comes  for  which  there  is  frequently  no  obvious 
explanation."  Since  this  element  plays  such  an  important  part,  not  only  m 
bone  and  teeth  formation  but  in  organic  functions  as  well,  the  frequent  de- 
ficiency of  calcium  in  the  diet  is  a  serious  defect  in  present  food  habits. 

7 


In  the  economic  study  of  dietaries  it  is  necessary  to  consider  the  different 
types  of  food  used,  the  influence  which  each  has  on  the  total  food  value,  and 
the  relation  between  cost  and  nutritive  return.  For  these  comparisons  foods 
have  been  divided  into  the  various  types  as  represented  in  Table  4. 


Table  4.      Average   distribution   of   expenditure  among  various  types 

of  food   in  92  families   (divided   into  4  groups  on 

the  basis  of  cost  per  man  per  day) 


Cost  per  man  per  day 
Cost  per  3000  calories 

Type  of  Food 


Meat-fish 

Eggs 

Milk 

Cream 

Cheese 

Fats 

Grain  products 

Sugars 

Vegetables .... 

Fruit 

Nuts 

Miscellaneous . 

Calories 

Protein 

Phosphorus,  .  . 

Calcium 

Iron 

Protein 

Phosphorus . .  . 

Calcium 

Iron 


Group  I 


19.2  cents 
26.1  cents 


Per  cent 


36.8 
4.5 
9.1 
0.3 
0.9 
6.7 

22.6 
3.4 
9.0 
2.3 
0.1 
4.3 


2043 

78  grams 
1.14  grams 
0.51  grams 
12.1  milligrams 


107  grams 
1.59  grams 
0.70  grams 
16.7  milligrams 


Group  IT 


28.2  cents 

30.3  cents 

Percentage 

Per  cent 

29.4 

6.4 

9.2 

0.2 

1.6 

8.1 
17.7 

4.4 

9.0 

7.2 

0.6 

6.2 


Group  III 


34.7  cents 
34.3  cents 

Distribution* 

Per  cent 

34.9 

5.4 

1.^ 

0.1 

0.8 

7.9 
17.9 

3,.^ 

9.2 

6.4 

0.1 

5.7 


Food  Value  per  Man  per  Day* 


2665 

91  grams 
1.39  grams 
0.64  grams 
14.9  milligrams 


3106 

109  grams 
1.60  grams 
0.72  grams 
17.7  milligrams 


Food  Value  per  3000  Calories 


104  grams 
1.57  grams 
0.77  grams 
16.7  milligrams 


102  grams 
1.54  grams 
0.71  grams 
17.1  milligrams 


•Group  IV 


49.4  cents 
44.7  cents 


Per  cent 

31.8 
5.9 
8.4 
1.2 
1.2 
98 

13.1 
3.6 
9.3 
8.2 
0.6 
6.9 


3889 

126  grams 
1.95  grams 
1.01  grams 
20.6  milligrams 


116  grams 
1.69  grams 
0.81  grams 
17.9  milligrams 


For  the  amount  of  each  type  of  food  consumed  see  Table  I  of  the  appendix. 


In  this  table  is  given  the  distribution  of  expenditure  for  the  various  types  of 
food  in  each  of  the  four  groups  as  described  on  page  5  with  the  corresponding 
return  in  food  value. 

It  is  clearly  evident  that  the  average  expenditure  in  Group  I  was  too  low 
to  provide  sufficient  energy  for  that  group.  If,  however,  the  cost  and  food 
factors  for  each  group  be  recalculated  in  proportion  to  3,000  calories  we  have 
a  basis  for  comparison  which  indicates:     (i)  that  if  energy  be  sufficient  the 

8 


other  food  factors  will  on  the  average  be  adequately  supplied,  and  (2) 
that  Group  I  was  getting  practically  the  same  amount  of  food  value  for  26 
cents  for  which  Group  IV  was  paying  45  cents.  It  should  also  be  noted  that 
while  only  one-fourth  were  spending  for  food  less  than  25  cents  per  man  per 
day,  about  50  to  75  per  cent  were  not  getting  enough  energy. 

In  order  that  we  may  judge  intelligently  with  regard  to  the  relative  value 
and  economy  of  various  foods,  we  must  know  to  what  extent  each  factor  is 
supplied  by  the  various  types  of  food.  Hence  special  attention  has  been  given 
to  those  types  which  supply  the  largest  amounts  of  the  various  factors  consid- 
ered here,  namely,  calories,  protein,  phosphorus,  calcium,  and  iron  (Table  5). 


Table  5.     Average  of  92  dietary   studies — percentage   expenditure  for 
each  type  of  food  with  the  corresponding  return  in  food  values 


Type  of  Food 


Range  of 
Expenditure 


Average 
Expendi- 
ture 


Calories 


Protein 


Phos- 
phorus 


Calcium 


Iron 


Meat-fish 

Eggs 

Milk-cream .  .  . 

Cheese 

Fats 

Grain  products 

Sugar 

Vegetables .  .  .  . 

Fruit 

Nuts 

Miscellaneous . 


Per  cent 
6.4-49.1 
0.0-15.9 
1.3-21.9 

0.0-8.9 
0.0-21.8 
3.8-42.8 

0.0-9.2 
0.4-19.1 
0.0-17.1 
0.0-  7.7 
0.0-17.6 


Per  cent 
33.2 
5.6 
9.1 
1.1 
8.1 
17.9 
3.8 
9.1 
6.0 
0.4 
5.7 


Per  cent 

16.5 

1.7 

8.1 

0.9 

10.3 

37.8 

10.8 

9.1 

3.9 

0.3 

0.6 


Per  cent 

36.3 
4.5 

10.1 
2.1 
0.3 

35.8 
0.1 
8.9 
1.1 
0.2 
0.6 


Per  cent 

It.l 
4.0 

18.5 
2.9 
0.3 

28.9 
0.1 

14.6 
2.4 
0.3 
1.3 


Per  cent 

3.7 

3.2 

50.2 

7.3 

0.7 

15.3 

0.7 

13.2 

4.7 

0.1 

0.9 


Per  cent 

31.4 

6.2 

4.7 

0.5 

0.4 

25.0 

0.2 

26.2 

4.1 

0.2 


Be  rearranging  the  dietaries  according  to  the  expenditure  for  the  various 
types  of  food  (which  ranged  for  meat  from  6  to  49  per  cent,  and  for  gram 
products  from  4  to  43  per  cent)  it  was  evident  that  deficiencies  frequently 
occurred  where  there  had  been  enough  money  to  supply  sufficient  food  value, 
but  where  the  relation  between  the  various  types  of  food  was  not  well  adjusted. 


MEAT   AND   FISH 

The  largest  expenditure  for  any  one  type  of  food  was  for  meat  and  fish, 
or  an  average  for  the  92  studies  of  33.2  per  cent  (wherever  meat  is  used  in  this 
discussion  both  meat  and  fish  are  included).  The  dietaries  were  arranged  in 
order  according  to  the  proportion  spent  for  meat.  It  was  found  that  only  17 
were  spending  less  than  25  per  cent,  while  49  were  spending  more  than  33 
per  cent  of  their  total  food  expenditure  for  this  type  of  food. 


CKartn  92  Dietaries 

Distribution  of  Expenditure  for  Meat 
Average  Expenditure  33.2% 


^^ 


J5- 


/O- 


5-10%  I0-1S%  lS-20%  20-2SS  2S-30*  30  »»  J5-1W  40-45*  45-50% 

Cost  perMan  per  day-   26  6^  49.6*  36.8*  315*  36.5*  34.7<  30.8*  2&5*  311* 

Average  Calories-  3172  4221  3677  3353  3165  2886  2731  2487  2246 

Cost  per  3000Calone$-23D*  35.3*  300*  30i)*34£*  36.1*  318*33.2*  415^ 


Chart  II  represents  the  distribution  of  expenditure  for  meat  with  the 
corresponding  cost  and  calories  for  each  group.  With  the  exception  of  the 
first  group  where  only  5  to  10  per  cent  of  the  food  expenditure  was  for  meat, 
the  calories  decreased  gradually  with  the  increase  in  the  percentage  of  total 
expenditure  for  meat.  While  it  is  true  that  those  spending  relatively  most 
for  meat  were  spending  least  for  total  food,  it  is  apparent  from  the  chart  that 
for  3,000  calories  it  would  have  cost  those  spending  over  25  to  30  per  cent  for 
meat  more  than  they  were  already  spending  for  food,  while  those  spending 

10 


less  than  25  per  cent  for  meat  were  getting  more  than  ^,000  calories.  In 
other  words,  the  greater  the  percentage  expenditure  for  meat  the  more  expensive 
the  dietary  for  adequate  energy.  It  would  have  cost  the  families  spending 
from  5  to  10  per  cent  for  meat  only  23  cents  for  3,000  calories,  whereas  it  would 
have  cost  those  families  spending  from  45  to  50  per  cent  for  meat  41.5  cents 
for  an  equal  amount  of  energy. 

When  the  92  dietaries  were  arranged  according  to  the  percentage  expendi- 
ture for  meat  and  averaged  in  4  groups  of  23  each,  as  shown  in  Table  6,  the 
ppint  mentioned  above  that  the  percentage  spent  for  meat  seems  to  increase 
with  the  decrease  in  total  food  expenditure,  is  strengthened. 


Table  6.     92  Dietaries  arranged  according  to  the  percentage  expendi- 
ture for  meat  and  averaged  in  groups  of  23  each 


AVERAGE 

AMOUNT  AND  DISTRIBUTION 
OF  EXPENDITURE 

AVERAGE  FOOD  VALUE 

Group 

Cost 

per 

Man 

Meat 

Eggs 

Cheese 

Grain 
Milk    Prod- 

Vege- 
tables 

Cal- 

Pro- 

♦Phos- 

♦Cal- 

Iron 

per 
Day 

ucts 

and 
Fruit 

ones 

tein 

phorus 

cium 

Cents 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Grams 

Grams 

Grams 

Milli- 
grams 

I 

34.8 

21.3 

6.0 

1.6 

9.3 

20.6 

18.9 

3386 

102 

1.64 

0.86 

17.3 

II 

35.7 

30.3 

6.5 

1.5 

8.7 

16.1 

21.9 

3129 

105 

1.62 

0.80 

17.4 

III 

31.5 

37.3 

5.5 

0.6 

8.0 

18.2 

13.4 

2747 

98 

1.38 

0.61 

15.4 

IV 

29.8 

42.0 

4.3 

0.9 

8.5 

16.5 

12.2 

2445 

99 

1.44 

0.61 

15.3 

*  Figures  here  given  are  for  the  element.  To  find  the  amount  of  lime  (CaO)  from  the 
amount  of  calcium  (Ca),  multiply  by  1.4.  To  find  the  amount  of  phosphorus  pento.xide 
(PgOg),  "phosphoric  acid,"  from  the  amount  of  phosphorus  (P),  multiply  by  2.29. 

This  relative  increase  in  meat  seems  to  be  more  at  the  expense  of  vegetables 
and  fruit  than  of  any  other  one  type  of  food.  Both  energy  and  calcium  seem 
to  decrease  with  an  increase  in  the  expenditure  for  meat.  It  would  have  cost 
Group  I,  30.8  cents  for  3,000  calories  with  only  21  per  cent  of  the  food  money 
spent  for  meat,  whereas  it  would  have  cost  Group  IV,  36.6  cents  with  an 
average  meat  expenditure  of  42  per  cent.  (For  further  details  with  regard 
to  the  amount  of  meat  consumed  and  for  prices  paid  for  meat,  see  Tables  I, 
II,  and  V  of  the  appendix.) 

GRAIN  PRODUCTS 

Under  the  head  of  grain  products  we  include  such  foods  as  bread,  cereals, 
macaroni,  and  rice.  The  92  dietaries  were  arranged  according  to  the  per- 
centage expenditure  for  this  type  of  food  and  averaged  in  4  groups  of  27,  each, 
Group  I  representing  the  23  families  spending  least  for  grain  products  and 
Group  IV,  the  23  spending  the  largest  amount.  The  results  are  given  m 
Table  7. 

11 


Table  7.     92  Dietaries  arranged  according  to  the  percentage  expendi- 
ture for  grain  products  and  averaged  in  groups  of  23  each 


A\^RAGE  AMOUNT  AND  DISTRIBUTION 

AVERAGE  FOOD  VALUE 

OF  EXENDITURE 

Cal- 

PER  3000  CALORIES 

Group 

Cost 

Cost 

Vege- 

per 
Man 

per 
3000 

Grain 
Prod- 

Milk 

Meat 

tables 
and 
Fruit 

Fats 
and 

Pro- 

♦Phos- 
phorus 

♦Cal- 

Iron 

per 

Cal- 

ucts 

Sugar 

tein 

cium 

Day 

ories 

Cents 

Cents 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Grams 

Grams 

Grams 

Milli- 
grams 

I 

41.8 

41.9 

10.1 

8.7 

35.2 

18.5 

15.9 

3010 

107 

1.66 

0.84 

17.91 

II 

33.9 

34.3 

15.2 

8.1 

32.9 

16.0 

12.5 

2967 

108 

1.63 

0.77 

17.66 

III 

31.7 

31.7 

18.4 

10.2 

32.0 

15.0 

12.8 

3007 

104 

1.57 

0.78 

16.08 

IV 

25.2 

27.5 

27.6 

7.6 

32.8 

11.4 

10.6 

2719 

108 

1.53 

0.63 

16.81 

*  See  note  at  the  foot  of  Table  6  (page  11). 

The  most  apparent  correlation  here  is  the  decrease  in  total  cost  of  food  as 
the  percentage  expended  for  grain  products  increases.  In  Group  I,  where 
only  lo  per  cent  of  total  food  expenditure  v^as  for  grain  products,  the  cost 
per  man  per  day  was  41.8  cents,  while  in  Group  IV,  where  the  percentage 
expenditure  for  grain  products  was  over  27  per  cent,  the  cost  was  only  25.2 
cents.  The  average  number  of  calories  in  Group  IV  was  only  2,719,  but  for 
3,000  calories  it  would  have  cost  this  group  only  27.5  cents,  while  it  would 
have  cost  Group  I  for  the  same  amount  of  energy  41.9  cents.  It  will  be  noted 
by  studying  Table  6  that  less  meat,  fat,  and  sugar  were  used  as  the  amount  of 

^^rpIiN^pnniirT*;     Relation  of  thefercentage  Expenditiire  for  Grain  Products  and  the  Ener^  received 
GRAIN  PRODUCTS     •  ^  proportion  b  Money  spent.  ( 92  studies  arranged  according  to  the  percent- 
age expenditure  for  grain  and  averaged  in  4  groups.  23  in  each  group) 


Croup        I\ 

m 

Ml 


m 


'  5  '   '   '   '■  h  '   '   '   '-/^  '   '   '  '  io'      '   '  h'  ' 
Perccnla^  Expenditure  for  Grain  Products  in  Each  Group 


Group 

i\ 

- 

n\ 

•• 

M\ 

•• 

m 

^5  JO 
Calories  forOneCentinQjrrespondin^  Groups 

Cost  per  Man  perDay  Cost  per  3000  Calorie* 

Group  I       41.8*  41.9* 

•  n       33.9+  343* 
••    IH       31.7*  31.7* 

•  E       25.2*  27.5* 


7J 


12 


grain  products  increased,  and  when  the  food  values  are  calculated  to  the  basis 
of  3,000  calories  neither  protein,  phosphorus,  or  iron  is  decreased  in  amount 
by  this  increase.  The  calcium  seems  to  have  been  affected,  but  it  will  become 
evident  when  we  consider  the  influence  of  the  amount  of  milk  used  that  this 
factor  is  controlled  almost  entirely  by  the  milk  consumption. 

On  Chart  III  there  is  represented  the  relative  return  in  calories  for  the 
money  spent  for  food  by  these  four  groups.  Group  I,  spending  41.8  cents,  was 
getting  in  return  only  72  calories  for  every  cent  spent,  while  Group  IV,  with 
an  expenditure  of  only  25.2  cents,  was  getting  in  return  108  calories  for  every 
cent.  It  appears  then  that  the  greater  the  expenditure  for  grain  products  the 
cheaper  the  dietary  for  energy,  while  the  amount  of  the  other  food  factors  are 
not  seriously  affected.  (For  the  amounts  and  prices  of  the  various  grain 
products  used  see  Tables  I,  III,  and  V  of  the  appendix.) 

MILK 

When  the  92  studies  were  arranged  in  four  groups  according  to  the  expendi- 
ture for  milk  in  the  same  manner  as  for  the  meat  and  fish  (Table  6),  or  grain 
products  (Table  7),  there  seemed  to  be  no  close  correlations  evident.  The 
percentage  spent  for  milk  increased  slightly  and  the  percentage  spent  for  meat 
decreased,  as  the  total  food  expenditure  decreased  (Table  8). 


Table  8.    92  Dietaries  arranged  according  to  the  percentage  expendi- 
ture for  milk  and  averaged  in  groups  of  23  each 


AVERAGE  AMOUNT  AND  DISTRIBUTION 
OF  EXPENDITURE 

AVERAGE  FOOD  VALUE 

Group 

Cost 

per 

Man 

Day 

Cost 
iper 
3000 
Cal- 
ories 

Milk 

Cream 

Cheese 

Meat 

Vege- 
tables 
and 
Fruit 

Cal- 
ories 

Pro- 
tein 

♦Phos- 
phorus 

♦Cal- 
cium 

Iron 

I 

II 
III 
IV 

Cents 

38.0 
29.9 
31.4 

Cents 

34.7 
34.8 
33.2 
32.8 

Per 

cent 

4.1 

6.8 

9.4 

14.2 

Per 

cent 

0.4 
0.8 
0.2 
0.3 

Per 

cent 

1.4 
1.1 
1.4 
0.7 

Per 

cent 

33.5 
32.1 
35.0 
32.2 

Per 

cent 

16.4 
15.8 
14.6 
13.8 

2884 
3259 
2655 
2906 

Grams 

95 
111 

94 
104 

Grams 

1.35 
1.64 
1.43 
1.65 

Grams 

0.55 
0.74 
0.70 
0.90 

Milli- 
grams 

16.3 

18.4 

14.9 

15.7 

»  See  note  at  the  foot  of  Table  6  (page  11). 

When  the  dietaries  were  arranged  according  to  the  amount  of  calcium  in  the 
diet,  averaged  in  groups  of  4,  the  average  amount  of  calcium  m  each  group 
calculated,  and  these  figures  were  compared  with  the  amount  spent  for  m.lk, 
cream,  and  cheese  in  the  corresponding  groups,  a  very  interestmg  correlation 
appeared  as  shown  on  Chart  IV. 

13 


Chart]? 

92  Dietaries  arran^d  according  to  the  Amount 
'^       of  Calcium.  Averaged  in  Groups  of  4  and  compared 
with  the  Corresponding  Expenditure  for  Milk 


2     ■ 

I  TO 

^2     w 


J 


.09- 

.06- 

.07- 

.06 

<A 

-P 

c 

.05 

& 

1 

.04 

g 

L^ 

«2 

.03 

Si^ 

1 

.02 

"3 

O- 

li^ 

.01 

.00 

12        3       4        5        6V 


lO      11       12       13      14:       15       16       n       18       19      20      21       22      23 


14 


The  standard  allowance  for  calcium  (0.69  gram)  is  not  reached  until  the 
thirteenth  group.  By  comparing  the  amount  spent  for  the  milk  with  the 
calcium  in  the  diet  it  appears  that  the  families  were  in  danger  of  insufficient 
calcium  when  they  were  spending  on  an  average  of  less  than  3  cents  per  man 
per  day  for  milk.  Since  milk  was  quite  generally  9  cents  a  quart  when  these 
studies  were  made,  it  would  seem  as  though  every  family  should  be  using  at 
the  rate  of  at  least  one-third  of  a  quart  of  milk  per  man  per  day  to  provide  the  ^ 
calcium  requirements  of  that  family.  More  milk  should  be  provided  whenever 
there  are  small  children,  as  nearly  as  possible  "a  quart  of  milk  a  day  for  every 
child."  In  the  average  of  these  dietaries  over  57  per  cent  of  the  total  calcium 
was  obtained  from  milk  and  cheese.  The  grain  products  and  the  vegetables 
contributed  12  and  15  per  cent,  respectively,  leaving  a  very  small  margin  to 
be  derived  from  the  several  remaining  types  of  food.  Since  the  calcium  is  so 
important,  and  since  the  amount  in  the  diet  is  dependent  to  such  a  large  extent 
upon  the  amount  of  milk  used,  the  use  of  milk  cannot  be  too  strongly  urged. 
(For  further  correlation  between  the  amount  of  milk  used  and  the  amount  of 
calcium  in  the  diet  see  Table  IV  of  the  appendix.  See  also  Tables  I  and  V 
for  amounts  used  and  prices  paid  for  milk.) 

VEGETABLES   AND   FRUIT 

Because  of  the  similarity  of  the  function  of  vegetables  and  fruit  in  nutrition 
these  foods  may  be  discussed  here  as  one  type. 

The  dietaries  were  arranged  according  to  the  percentage  expenditure  for 
vegetables  and  fruit  combined,  and  averaged  in  4  groups  as  previously.  The 
results  are  shown  in  Table  9. 


Table  9.   92  Dietaries  arranged  according  to  the  percentage  expendi- 
ture for  Vegetables  and  Fruit— and   averaged   in  groups  of  23  each 


WERAGE  AMOUNT  AND  DISTRIBUTION 
OF  EXPENDITURE 

AVERAGE  FOOD  VALUE 

Group 

Cost 
Per 
Man 
Per 
Day 

Cost 
Per 
3000 
Cal- 
ories 

Vege- 
tables 

Fruit 

Meat 

Milk 

Grain 
Prod- 
ucts 

Cal- 
ories 

Pro- 
tein 

♦Phos- 
phorus 

♦Cal- 
cium 

Iron 

I 

II 
III 
IV 

Cents 

25.6 
35.0 
32.7 
39.4 

Cents 

31.2 
34.6 
34.5 
35.0 

Per 

cent 

5.6 

8.9 

10.5 

10.9 

Per 

cent 

2.5 

4.5 

6.3 

10.9 

Per 

cent 

38.2 
36.3 
30.4 
27.8 

Per 

cent 

9.0 
8.2 
9.4 
7.9 

Per 

cent 

21.5 
19.1 
17.4 
13.4 

2428 
3072 
2905 
3359 

Grams 

93 
109 
100 
102 

Grams 

1.36 
1.60 
1.53 
1.60 

Grams 

0.61 
0.70 
0.77 
0.81 

MiUi- 
grams 

13.8 

17.3 

16.5 

17.6 

See  note  at  the  foot  of  Table  6  (page  11). 

15 


Each  of  the  ash  constituents  seems  to  be  favorably  influenced  by  the  in- 
crease in  the  use  of  vegetables  and  fruit,  the  iron  and  calcium  rather  more  so 
than  the  phosphorus.  The  relation  between  the  amount  of  iron  and  vege- 
tables and  fruit  is  shown  in  Chart  V. 

ChartY 

IRON.  Relation  between  the  Amount  of  Iron  in  the  Diet  and  the  Percentage  Expenditure  for  Vegetables 
and  Fruits.  (92  dietaries  arranged  according  to  the  amount  of  iron  in  the  diet,  averaged 
in  4  groups) 


Group      l\ 

II\ 


J  10  _  15 

Iron  per  Man  perDay_  Milligrams 


Group      n 

E\ 


m 


0  3  10  15 

Corresponding  Percentage  Expenditure  for  Vegetables  and  Fruits 

Table  lo  might  indicate  that  the  amount  of  iron  was  more  especially  in- 
fluenced by  the  expenditure  for  meat,  but  when  the  iron  figures  are  calculated 
to  3, coo  calories  in  Tables  6,  7,  8,  and  9  the  amount  of  iron  per  3,000  calories 
seems  to  be  practically  the  same  for  each  group.  We  shall  see  in  Chart  VII 
that  by  reducing  the  expenditure  for  meat  and  increasing  the  expenditure  for 
vegetables  the  iron  is  increased  slightly.  This  will  depend,  obviously,  on  the 
kind  of  vegetables  used.  (For  the  amounts  and  prices  of  vegetables  and  fruits 
used  see  Tables  I  and  V  of  the  appendix.) 

BUTTER  AND  OTHER  FATS,  AND  SUGAR 

According  to  these  dietaries,  the  fats  and  sugars  contribute  on  an  average 
about  20  per  cent  of  the  total  energy  of  the  diet,  but  very  little  of  any  of  the 
other  factors  considered  in  this  study.  The  question  arises  whether  there  may 
not  be  danger  of  a  deficiency  of  some  of  the  ash  constituents  through  too  liberal 
a  use  of  fat  and  sugar?  When  the  dietaries  were  averaged  according  to  the 
amount  of  iron  at  3,000  calories  the  relation  between  the  iron  and  the  per- 
centage of  energy  from  the  fats  and  the  sugar  appeared  as  shown  in  Table  10, 
and  as  represented  on  Chart  VI.  As  the  amount  of  iron  increased  there  was 
a  decided  decrease  in  the  percentage  of  the  calories  from  fats  and  sugar. 

16 


Table  10.     92  Dietaries  arranged   according   to   the  amount   of 
in  the  diet  at  3,000  calories  and  averaged  in  4  groups 


iron 


FOOD  VALUE  AND  COST  AT 
3,000  CALORIES 

AVERAGE  AMOUNT  AND  DLSTRIBU- 
TION  OF  EXPENDITURE 

Cal- 

Group 

Cost 
per 

Man 
per 

Day 

Iron 

Pro- 
tein 

♦Phos- 
phorus 

♦Cal- 
cium 

Meat 

Milk 

Vege- 
tables 
and 
Fruit 

Grain 
Prod- 
ucts 

Fats 

Sugar 

ories 
from 
Fats 
and 
Sugars 

Cents 

Milli- 
grams 

Grams 

Grams 

Grams 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Per 

cent 

Per 
cent 

I 

31.7 

13.90 

90 

1.37 

0.71 

28.8 

9.7 

15.9 

17.8 

10.8 

4.7 

26.7 

11 

33.9 

16.16 

104 

1.58 

a77 

32.7 

8.1 

14.5 

18.2 

8.6 

3.8 

21.8 

III 

31.2 

17.94 

109 

1.66 

0.76 

31.4 

9.2 

15.9 

19.6 

7.7 

3.7 

19.1 

IV 

38.4 

20.40 

128 

1.78 

0.75 

39.9 

7.5 

14.3 

15.9 

5.5 

3.0 

16.7 

*  See  note  at  the  foot  of  Table  6  (page  11). 

When  the  dietaries  were  arranged  according  to  the  peroentage  expendi- 
ture for  butter  and  sugar,  the  same  relationship  between  fats  and  sugar  and 
the  amount  of  iron  in  the  diet  was  apparent.  In  Group  I,  where  only  7.7 
per  cent  of  the  money  was  spent  for  fats  and  sugar  there  were  18.5  milli- 
grams of  iron  per  man  per  day.  In  group  IV,  16.4  per  cent  of  the  money 
was  spent  for  fats  and  sugar  with  only  15  milligrams  of  iron  per  man  per 
day.  In  many  individual  cases  where  the  amount  spent  for  fats  and  sugar 
was  above  the  average,  the  iron  figures  were  considerably  below  what 
seemed  a  safe  allowance. 

It  would  seem  then  as  though  some  of  the  money  spent  for  fats  and 
sugar  might  better  be  spent  for  vegetables  and  fruit.  (For  the  amounts 
and  prices  of  fats  and  sugars  used  see  Tables  I  and  V  of  the  appendix.) 


^^'^^iSN-  Relation  between  theAmountof  Iron  intheDiet  and  the  percentage  of  Calories  from  FaU 
and  Sugar.(92  dietaries  arranged  according  to  the  amount  of  iron  (per  3000  calories)- 


Group 


averaged  in  groups  of  23) 


Iron  per  Man  per  Day_  Milligrams 


Percendj^  of  Calories  from  Butter  and  Suj?^,r  in  con-espond«a^Gro»ip3 
17 


From  these  results  it  would  seem  as  though  the  family  dietary,  at  least 
among  city  people  of  limited  means,  is  often  relatively  poor  in  energy  and  cal- 
cium, and  sometimes  also  in  iron  or  phosphorus.  As  the  percentage 
expenditure  for  meat  increases  the  diet  tends  to  suffer  in  energy.  As  the 
relative  expenditure  for  grain  products  increases,  the  energy  is  increased. 
Calcium  seems  to  be  dependent  to  a  large  extent  on  the  amount  of  milk  used, 
and  both  iron  and  calcium  are  favorably  influenced  by  increasing  the  propor- 
tion of  expenditure  for  vegetables  and  fruits.  In  the  average  diet  the  expen- 
diture for  milk,  vegetables  and  fruit  are  much  overbalanced  by  the 
expenditure  for  meat.  If  there  were  an  equal  expenditure  for  (i)  meat,  (2) 
milk,  (3)  fruit  and  vegetables,  there  is  little  doubt  that  the  results  irf  food  value 
would  be  more  favorable  to  a  well  balanced  diet.  In  Chart  VII  we  have 
reconstructed  a  dietary  according  to  the  suggested  distribution.  In  each 
case,  A  represents  the  allowance  as  given  on  page  6  for  each  of  the  five 
chief  food  factors.  B  represents  the  amount  of  each  corresponding  food  factor 
which  this  family  was  receiving  where  49  per  cent  of  its  total  food  money  was 
spent  for  meat,  26  per  cent  for  grain  products,  10  per  cent  for  milk,  and  7.8 
per  cent  for  vegetables. 
ChartYir 

Chart  to  show  the  Increase  in  Food  Value  when  the  expenditure 
for  Milk,Meat,andVe^ tables  and  Fruit  are  made  exjual. 

A- Standard  Allowance 
B-  Food  Value  from  the  Original  Distribution  of  money 
C- Food  Value  possible  by  Redistribution  of  money 
D-FoodValue  at  3000  Calories  CC) 


CALORIES 

A  1-                                                                                                                                  ~l 

."L     [                                                                                                                                                                                                                             -1 

B| 

m 

c  Hi 

HHIH! 

PROTEIN 

PHOSPHORUS 

a    1                            '                                      ' ' 

A   1 

1 

1 

1 

b| 

1 

1 

J 

c  B^^^^B                          l^^^l^ 

°  i. 

CALCIUM 

s::J            p::.-. 

IRON 

A     1                                             '                                                             '                        ' 

A  1 

1 

1 

1 

B| 

Z] 

1       1 

c  m 

HIHH 

■ 

Di  - 

.  ■■,■•■,,.;;.,  •  ,;  ■ 

13        |;-:;- 

^ .  ^:.-^:-m 

The  Standard  Allowances 
used  are  those  given  on 
page  6 


Actual  Expenditure  per  Man  per  Dtay_H.3+ 
Cosi  of  3000  Calories  ( B)        28.0^ 

Cost  of  3000  Calories  (C)      22.3^ 


18 


Since  they  were  spending  only  11.3  cents  for  food,  it  is  evident  that  they 
could  not  have  been  getting  what  they  needed.  Had  they  been  spending  more 
for  milk  and  vegetables  and  less  for  meat,  or  equal  amounts  for  these  three 
types  of  food,  they  would,  however,  have  been  getting  more  food  value  for  the 
same  money  as  represented  by  C  in  Chart  VII.  According  to  the  way  in  which 
they  were  spending  the  money,  it  would  have  cost  them  28  cents  for  3,000 
calories,  whereas,  had  they  spent  equal  amounts  for  milk,  meat,  and  vegetables, 
it  would  have  cost  them  only  22.3  cents  for  the  3,000  calories.  Although  this 
dietary  was  somewhat  extreme  in  the  amount  of  money  spent  for  food,  18 
dietaries  similarly  reconstructed  give  corresponding  increases  in  food  value. 
As  none  of  the  five  food  factors  here  represented  would  have  suffered  in  any 
case  by  this  redistribution,  it  would  seem  as  though  the  average  diet  would 
be  improved  so  far  as  food  value  is  concerned  by  reducing  meat  and  increasing 
milk,  vegetables,  and  fruit. 

The  changing  of  food  habits  is  a  gradual  process.  That  there  is  considerable 
room  for  improvement  is  fairly  well  recognized.  That  there  has  been  some 
improvement  through  education  and  other  forces  is  evidenced  by  Chart  VIII. 

ChartM    Improvement  in  Food  Habits  through  Education.  Actual  expend- 
iture forMilkyegetablesand  Fruit  Compared  with  a  Proposed  Standard 

FVoposed  Standard  Percentage  Expenditure  for  Mi  Ik,  Vegetables  and  Fruit  A.I.C.P 


Actual  Percentage  Expenditure  for  Milk,Vegetables  and  Fruit 


1891-1895 

Average  Expenditure  of  80  Families 

1914-1915 

Average  Expenditure  of  92  Families 

1914 

Average  of  10 Al.C.P  Families-Influenced 
by  a  Dietitian 


The  upper  line  in  Chart  VIII  represents  an  expenditure  for  milk,  vegetables, 
and  fruit  as  proposed  by  the  Relief  Department  of  the  New  York  Association 
for  Improving  the  Condition  of  the  Poor.  The  average  of  80  families  in  1891- 
1895  shows  an  expenditure  for  these  foods  of  only  half  what  this  allowance 
calls  for  These  families  had  a  high  average  expenditure  for  meat.  The 
average  of  92  families  in  1914-1915  shows  a  slight  increase  in  the  relative 
expenditure  for  milk,  vegetables,  and  fruit.  The  average  of  10  famdies  which 
had  been  strongly  influenced  by  the  educational  efforts  of  the  New  Yo  k 
Association  for  Improving  the  Condition  of  the  Poor  showed  a  materially 
greater  increase. 

19 


A   SUGGESTION   FOR   THE   COMPARISON   OF   FOOD  VALUES 

Discussion  of  food  values  may  seem  confusing  to  the  layman  who  is  told 
that  one  food  is  valuable  for  certain  factors,  another  for  other  factors  plus 
some  of  those  already  given,  and  still  another  for  some  of  those  in  one,  some  of 
those  in  the  other,  and  has  other  valuable  qualities  in  addition.  If  we  compare 
the  cost  of  each  type  of  food  with  the  energy  and  individual  nutrients  which  it 
furnishes,  it  is  difficult  to  decide  which  expenditures  are  more  economical. 
Thus  in  Table  5  (page  9)  meat  and  fish  cost  one-third  of  the  total  expenditure 
for  food  and  furnished  about  one-third  of  the  protein,  phosphorus,  and  iron, 
but  only  one-sixth  of  the  energy  and  about  one-thirtieth  of  the  calci^lm.  Grain 
products  were  less  than  one-fifth  of  the  cost  but  furnished  over  one-third  of 
the  energy  and  protein,  one-fourth  of  the  iron  and  phosphorus  and  about  one- 
sixth  of  the  calcium.  Milk,  costing  less  than  one-tenth  of  the  total  food 
expenditure,  furnished  corresponding  amounts  of  energy  and  protein  but  over 
half  of  the  calcium  and  very  little  iron.  It  becomes  difficult  to  judge  the  rela- 
tive merits  of  different  types  of  food  as  soon  as  we  try  to  consider  the  various 
factors  of  food  value  which  we  now  know  to  be  important  Certainly  one  not 
familiar  with  food  composition  and  the  terminology  used  is  likely  to  become 
confused. 

To  assist  in  overcoming  this  confusion,  it  has  seemed  worth  while  to  try  to 
combine  these  various  factors  of  food  value  in  such  a  way  that  the  relative 
values  of  foods  may  be  expressed  by  single  terms.  We  have  endeavored  to  do 
this  by  means  of  assigning  arbitrary  values  to  each  factor  on  the  principle  of  a 
score  card.  In  assigning  these  arbitrary  values  we  have  taken  into  considera- 
tion the  fact  that  energy  is  the  most  frequent  deficiency  in  American  dietaries 
and  that  the  majority  of  dietaries  studied  would  furnish  enough  of  all  other 
factors  if  the  energy  were  adequate.  We  have,  therefore,  assigned  to  energy 
a  value  of  about  half  its  total  or  combined  food  value.  We  have  assigned 
equal  values  to  protein,*  calcium,  phosphorus  and  iron.  Since  any  score  card 
has  to  be  made  arbitrarily  and  the  results  can  be  only  indicative  and  relative, 
we  have  suggested  two  systems  of  scoring.  The  bases  of  the  two  systems  are 
as  follows: 

If  we  give  to  energy  a  value  of  60  on  the  scale  of  100,  and  to  protein,  cal- 
cium, phosphorus,  and  iron  each  a  value  of  10,  the  combined  value  ("composite 
valuation")  of  a  type  of  food  like  meat  and  fish  which  in  the  average  of  92 
dietaries  furnished  16.5  per  cent  of  the  energy,  36.3  per  cent  of  the  protein, 
26.7  per  cent  of  the  phosphorus,  3.7  per  cent  of  the  calcium,  and  31.4  per  cent 
of  the  iron,  would  score  as  given  under  I  in  Table  10. 

If  a  value  of  40  were  assigned  to  the  energy,  and  15  to  each  of  the  other 
factors,  meat  and  fish  would  score  as  given  under  II  in  Table  10.  This  system 
of  weighting  would  give  less  prominence  to  sugar  and  fat,  and  slightly  less  to 
grain  products,  but  place  more  emphasis  on  vegetables,  milk,  meat  and  eggs. 


*  In  reality,  this  amounts  to  giving  a  higher  valuation  to  protein  since  this  is  counted 
both  as  protein  and  as  a  part  of  the  energy  as  well. 

20 


Because  of  this  variation  in  emphasis,  it  has  seemd  advisable  to  give  the  two 
systems  of  weighting  throughout  for  purposes  of  comparison. 

Table  10.     Score  for  meat  and  fish 


Per  cent  of 
Food  Value 
Supplied  by 
Meat  and  Fish  in 
92  Dietaries 

I 

II 

Assigned  Values 

Points 

Assigned  Values 

Points 

Energy 

16.5  per  cent 

60 

9.90 

40 

6.60 

Protein 

36.3  per  cent 

10 

3.63 

15 

5.45 

Phosphorus 

26.7  per  cent 

10 

2.67 

15 

4.01 

Calcium 

3.7  per  cent 

10 

0.37 

15 

0.56 

Iron 

31.4  per  cent 

10 

3.14 
19.71 

15 

4.71 
21.33 

This  gives  us  a  score  for  the  average  combined  food  value  of  meat  as  pur- 
chased by  92  families.  Similarly  we  would  find  milk  to  score  13.22  (I)  or 
15.78  (II),  according  to  the  values  used.  The  relative  value  of  meat  and  fish 
and  milk  may  be  expressed  by  (I)  19.7  for  meat  against  13.2  for  milk,  or  (II) 
21.3  for  meat  against  15.8  for  milk.  The  combined  food  value  ('^composite 
valuation")  for  each  type  of  food  according  to  these  two  different  values  is 
given  in  Table  11. 


Table   11.       The  relative  food   value  of   the  various   types    of    food, 
based  on  the  combined  food  value 


Type  of  Food 

Score  for  the  Combined 

Food  Value 
(''Composite  Valuation") 

I 

II 

Meat  and  fish 

Eggs 

Milk  (and  cream) 

Cheese 

Butter  and  other  fats 

Grain  products 

Sugar  and  molasses 

Vegetables 

Fruit 

Nuts 

Miscellaneous 

19.7 
2.8 

13.2 
1.9 
6.3 

33.2 
6.6 

11.7 
3.6 
0.2 
0.8 

21.3 
3.4 

15.8 
2.3 
4.4 

30.8 
4.5 

13.1 
3.4 
0.2 
0.8 

21 


These  figures  would  seem  to  suggest  that  meat  scores  higher  as  a  food  than 
milk.  While  this  may  be  true  per  unit  of  weight,  it  is  not  true  per  unit  of 
cost.  For  every  cent  spent  for  meat  we  get  in  these  studies  only  0.60  (I) 
of  a  point  of  food  value  in  return,  whereas  for  every  cent  spent  for  milk  we 
get  1.45  (I)  points  of  food  value,  or  0.64  (II)  for  meat  against  1.73  (II)  for  milk. 

The  relation  between  cost  and  food  value  for  each  type  of  food  is  shown  in 
Table  12. 


Table   12.     To  show  the  relative  return  in  combined  food  value  for 
an  equal  amount  of  money  spent  for  each  type  of  iood 


Type  of  Food 

Cost  in  Per  cent 

of  Total 

Expenditure 

The  Combined  Food  \'alue  Divided  by 
the  Per  cent  of  Total  Expenditure. 

T 

II 

Meat  and  fish        

Per  cent 
33.2 
5.6 
9.1 
1.1 
8.1 
17.9 
3.8 
9.1 
6.0 
0.4 
5.7 

Points 
0.60 
0.50 
1.45 
1.73 
0.78 
1.85 
1.74 
1.29 
0.60 
0.50 
0.14 

Points 
0.64 

Eggs 

0.61 

Milk  (and  cream) 

Cheese                        

1.73 
2.09 

Butter  and  other  fats 

Grain  products 

0.54 
1.72 

Sugar  and  molasses 

Vegetables                         .... 

1.18 
1.44 

Fruit 

0.57 

Nuts 

0.50 

Miscellaneous 

0.14 

By  comparing  the  composite  valuation  with  the  cost  it  will  be  seen  that 
if  either  of  these  methods  of  estimating  comparative  values  is  at  all  valid,  the 
money  spent  in  these  92  families  for  milk  and  cheese,  grain  products  and  veg- 
etables brought  a  better  relative  return  in  food  value  and  was  therefore  better 
invested  than  the  money  spent  for  meats  and  fish,  eggs,  and  fruit.   • 

In  making  any  such  comparison,  it  must  be  kept  prominently  in  mind  (i) 
that  the  values  assigned  to  the  different  factors  of  food  value  must  necessarily 
be  more  or  less  arbitrarily  chosen  so  that  the  resulting  ''combined  value,"  or 
''score  value,"  rests  partly  on  facts  and  partly  on  assumptions;  (2)  that  not  all 
the  important  factors  of  food  value  are  taken  into  account  in  these  valuations, 
the  "vitamine  values"  being  wholly  omitted  from  the  calculations  because  as 
yet  we  have  not  the  data  necessary  to  permit  us  to  give  them  numerical  ex- 
pression (it  is  quite  possible  that  when  it  becomes  feasible  to  state  the  "vita- 
mine  values"  in  numerical  terms  and  give  them  due  weight  in  the  composite 

22 


valuation,  the  expenditures  for  eggs  and  butter  may  appear  more  economical 
than  is  indicated  by  the  above  table);  (3)  that  the  assumption  that  a  given 
amount  of  protein,  of  phosphorus,  of  calcium,  or  of  iron,  is  of  the  same  value 
in  whatever  food  found,  which  is  certainly  not  true  in  detail,  and  may  be  very 
far  from  true  in  many  cases;  (4)  that  any  attempt  to  reduce  foods  to  a  single 
basis  for  comparison  necessarily  tends  to  obscure  these  differences  which  must 
be  kept  in  mind  in  order  to  give  each  food  its  proper  place  in  a  well  balanced 
dietary.  Any  comparisons  based  on  the  use  of  such  arbirtary  valuations  as 
can  at  present  be  assigned  must  therefore  be  used  with  much  discretion  if 
misconceptions  are  to  be  avoided;  if  so  used,  however,  they  may  be  found 
serviceable  as  a  guide  in  the  economical  choice  of  food,  and  to  some  extent  in 
teaching  relative  food  values. 

While  this  method  may  be  open  to  criticism,  it  seems  much  fairer  to  the 
various  foods  than  stating  the  relative  value  in  terms  of  calories  only.  Chart 
IX  compares  the  two  methods.  In  one  case  we  have  the  return  per  unit  of 
cost  in  calories  and  in  the  other  case  the  return  per  unit  of  cost  in  terms  of  the 
"combined"  food  value  ("composite  valuation").  Fats  and  sugars  occupy 
a  much  more  prominent  place  when  calories  alone  are  considered,  while  milk, 
cheese,  and  vegetables  rank  much  higher  in  the  scale  where  the  ash  constituents 
are  taken  into  consideration. 

ChartlX  Return  in  Food  Value  for  Money  Spent  for  Food 

Ratio  between  a)stand  Calories  Ratio  between  Cost  and  Combined  Food  Value 


FRUIT  ^^^^ 

I  0.6b 


NUT&  i^BH"'^'^ 

MISCELUNtOUS      |o.U 

portion  to  cost,  grain  products  second,  and  '^"'^^^  f™  "^    ,  „„,  comparison 
view  of  the  lack  of  ash  constituents  n,  both  suga  '^"^^^^^;;'  .;';;„„,'' 
on  the  basis  of  calories  alone  is  pla.nly  not  fa.r  to  m,lk  an.l  ^cget 

23 


Chart  X 


Comparison  Between  Calories  an(l'Combined"Food  Value  per  unit  of  Cost 
for  Each  of  the  Main  Types  of  Food.    Averageof 92  Studies. 


MILK -CHEESE 
GRAIN  PRODUCTS 

VEGETABLES 

MEAT.EGGS.NUTS 

FRUIT 


CALORIES 


— I— 

JO 


/oo 


/<50 


^00 


MILK -CHEESE 
CRA.IN  PRODUCTS 
VEGETABLES 
MEAT-EGGS^NUTS 
FRUIT 


COMBINED  FOOD  VALUE 


^0 


100 


t60 


£0C 


Individual  articles  of  food  may  be  calculated  to  a  basis  of  combined  food 
value  in  a  similar  manner.  Thus  if  loo  calories  be  given  a  value  of  40  on  the 
scale  of  100,  and  such  quantities  of  protein,  phosphorus,  calcium,  and  iron  as 
should  accompany  100  calories  in  an  adequate  economical  diet  be  given  a 
value  of  15  each,  the  score  for  almonds  might  be  ascertained  as  follows: 

To  every  100  calories  of  almonds  there  are  3.23  grams  of  protein,  0.071 
gram  of  phosphorus,  0.039  gram  of  calcium,  and  0.0006  gram  of  iron.  If  we 
accept  for  the  standard  allowance*  of  man  75  grams  of  protein,  1.44  grams  of 
phosphorus,  0.69  gram  of  calcium,  and  15  milligrams  of  iron,  to  every  loo 
calories  of  the  3,000  ordinarily  taken  as  the  requirement  of  a  man  at  ordinary 
labor,  there  should  be  2.5  grams  of  protein,  0.048  gram  of  phosphorus,  0.02 
gram  of  calcium  and  0.0005  gram  of  iron.  Then  to  every  100  calories  of 
almonds  there  is  1.3  (3.23  divided  by  2.5)  the  amount  of  protein  required  to 
''balance"  the  energy  value;  1.48  the  amount  of  phosphorus,  1.85  the  amount 
of  calcium,  and  1.2  the  amount  of  iron.  Scoring  these  as  indicated  above,  we 
have  the  score  value  for  almonds  as  follows: 


Assumed  Vakies 

Score 

Points 

Calories  (100)                40 

40 

Protein                1.3    x  15 

19.5 

Phosphorus         1.48  x  15 

22.2 

Calcium              1.85  x  15 

27.8 

Iron                     1.20  x  15 

18.0 

127.5 

*  See  Page  6 


24 


Since  a  pound  of  almonds  contains  16.14  loo-calorie  portions,  then  a  pound 
of  almonds  has  a  score  value  of  2058  (127.5  multiplied  by  16.14).  Table  14 
gives  the  score  value  of  the  common  typical  foods: 


Table  14.      Score  Value   (Composite  Valuation)   per  pound    of  8ome 
common  typical  foods. 


Meat — Beef,  medium  fat , 
Bacon 


Fish — Cod,  salt .  .  , 
Salmon,  canned . 

Eggs 


Cheese — Cottage 
Hard 


Milk — Condensed,  sweetened 
"       unsweetened 

Skimmed 

Whole 


Butter 


Cream— 10%  fat . 
40%  fat 


Lard . .  .  . 
OUve  oil 


Sugar — Brown . 

White 

Corn  syrup .  . 
Maple  syrup. 
Molasses.  .  .  . 


Grain  Products — 

Barley,  pearled 

Bread,  entire  wheat. 

"       graham 

"       white 


rye 

Cornmeal 

Crackers 

Cornflakes 

Cream  of  Wheat . 

Farina 

Force 

Flour,  graham .  . 

'*      rye 

"      white.  .  .  . 

Hominy 

Macaroni 

Oatmeal 

Rice 

Shredded  Wheat 
Tapioca 


1480 
1750 

1310 
930 

1092 

1287 
4460 

2005 

1556 

514 

612 

2320 

869 
1342 

2450 

2449 

1231 
1090 
960 
1080 
1978 


n 

1630 
1324 

1710 
1074 

1341 

1688 
5690 

2267 

1955 

688 

761 

1744 

862 
1150 

1645 

1630 

983 
725 
800 
974 
2315 


1513 

1470 

1325 

1429 

1409 

1525 

1098 

1060 

1125 

nil 

1444 

1360 

1579 

1433 

1270 

1090 

1460 

1370 

1418 

1308 

2078 

2316 

2001 

2188 

1502 

1459 

1372 

1257 

1301 

1147 

1502 

1444 

2245 

2465 

1289 

1139 

2028 

2214 

1262 

1091 

Vegetables — 

Asparagus,  fresh . . . 
Beans,  dry,  white. . 

"  "    limas.  . 

"       fresh  limas 

"       string 

Beets 

Cabbage 

Carrots 

CauUflower 

Celery 

Corn,  canned 

Cucumbers 

Lentils 

Lettuce 

Onions 

Peas,  dry 

"      fresh 

Parsnips 

Potatoes,  sweet .  . 
"         white.  . 

Radishes 

Rhubarb 

Spinach 

Squash 

Tomatoes 

Turnips 


Fruit — 

Apples,  fresh . 
"       dry... 

Bananas 

Dates 

Figs 

Grapefruit. . 

Grapes 

Lemons 

OUves 

Oranges , 
Peaches,  fresh. 

Pears 

Pineapple .  .  .  . 

Plums 

Prunes 

Raisins 

Strawberries . 


Nuts 
Almonds 
Cocoa .  .  . 
Filberts . 
Peanuts 
Pecans. 
Walnuts. 


279 

2767 

2380 
363 
374 
246 
285 
278 
487 
256 
497 
125 

2834 
223 
263 

2510 
400 
349 
399 
377 
161 
170 
576 
130 
162 
246 

175 

1075 

254 

1298 

1667 

167 

286 

199 

1000 

209 

169 

236 

234 

345 

1144 

1290 

293 


1900 
2900 
1676 
2010 
1556 
798 


n 


368 

3367 
780 
420 
472 
286 
367 
338 
661 
350 
523 
153 

3464 
299 
295 

2960 
475 
405 
374 
414 
195 
224 
810 
144 
192 
307 

156 

955 

236 

1240 

1782 

169 

266 

228 

1004 

228 

177 

228 

253 

337 

1135 

1235 

355 


2045 
3231 
1752 
2078 
1440 
768 


25 


APPENDIX 

Table  T.     Number  of  ounces  of  food  used  per  man  per  day  in  each  of 
four  groups  where  92  dietaries  are  divided  on  the  basis  of  expenditure. 


Group  I 

Cost  per  Man 
per  Day— 
19.2  Cents 

Group  II 

Cost  per  Man 
])er  Day — 
28.2  Cents 

Group  III 

Cost  per  Man 
per  Day — 
34.7  Cents 

Group  IV 

Cost  per  Man 
per  Day — 
49.4  Cents 

Meat  and  fish— Total 

Beef 

Ounces 

6.74 
2.96 
0.39 
0.88 
0.56 
0.29 
1.66 

0.78 

0.15 

7.80 
7.49 
0.31 

0.09 

0.64 

11.51 
9.58 

1.80 

11.78 
7.80 
0.30 

2.48 
0.04 

0.01 

0.32 

Ounces 

7.34 
2.87 
0.42 
0.67 
1.36 
0.89 
1.13 

1.39 

0.37 

9.07 
8.94 
0.13 

0.06 

1.15 

11.97 
7.37 

2.97 

13.01 
8.11 
0.41 

5.55 
0.21 

0.06 

0.45 

Ounces 

9.59 
4.46 
0.50 
0.96 
1.81 
0.80 
1.06 

1.40 

0.20 

10.45 
10.25 
0.20 

0.02 

1.36 

14.29 

8.89 

3.09 

13.97 
8.04 
0.33 

8.37 
0.11 

0.19 

0.72 

• 

Ounces 

11.64 
4.09 

Veal 

0.50 

Lamb  and  mutton 

Pork 

1.64 
2.12 

Fowl  and  game 

Fish 

1.69 
1.60 

Eggs 

1.80 

Cheese 

0.45 

Milk— Total 

14.73 

Fresh 

14.53 

Condensed 

Cream .... 

0.20 

0.63 

Butter  and  other  fats .... 

Grain  products — Total .  .  . 
Bread 

2.42 

14.03 
7.06 

Sugar.  . 

3.87 

Vegetables— Total 

Potatoes 

18.07 
10.58 

Dry  vegetables 

Fruit— Total 

0.36 

11.63 

Drv  fruit 

0.33 

Nuts 

0.29 

Coffee  and  tea 

0.83 

Total  food — Ounces 

44.10 

53.39 

63.65 

80.49 

26 


APPENDIX 

Table  II.     92  Dietaries  arranged  according   to   the  amount  of  meat 
t>sed,  and  averaged  in  groups  of  23  each. 


Group 

Amount  of 

Meat  per  Man 

per  Day 

Cost  of  Total 

Food  per  Man 

per  Day 

Calories 

Cost  of  Total 

Food  per 
3000  Calories 

Amount  of 
Meat 

Adjusted  in 
Proportion  to 
3000  Calories 

Ounces 

Cents 

Cents 

Otinces 

I 

5.0 

24.6 

2548 

29.1 

5.9 

II 

7.3 

30.5 

2857 

31.7 

7.7 

III 

9.5 

32.8 

2900 

34.8 

9.8 

IV 

13.5 

44.7 

3397 

39.9 

11.9 

Table  III.     92  Dietaries  arranged  according  to   the  amount  of  grain 
products  used,  and  averaged  in  4  groups. 


Group 

Amount  of 

Grain  Products 

per  Man  per 

Day 

Cost  of  Total 

Food  per  Man 

per  Day 

Calorics 

Cost  of  Total 

Food  per 
3000  Calories 

Amount  of 

Grain  Products 

.\d justed  in 

Proportion  to 

3000  Calories 

Ounces 

Cents 

Cents 

Ounces 

I 

7.9 

31.6 

2473 

37.9 

9.6 

II 

10.8 

30.7 

2556 

35.1 

12.7 

III 

13.9 

33.8 

3061 

32.5 

13.6 

IV 

19.2 

36.5 

3613 

29.7 

16.0 

Table  IV.      92  Dietaries  arranged  according  to  the  amount  of  milk 
used,  and  compared  with  the  calcium. 


Group 

Amount  of 
Milk  Used  per 
Man  per  Day 

Amount  of 
Calcium  per 
Man  per  Day 

I 

II 
III 
IV 

Ounces 

4.11 

8.68 

11.95 

19.29 

Grants 
0.473 
0.616 
0.747 
1.474 

27 


APPENDIX 


Table  V.^    To  show  the  range  of  prices,  the  average  price  paid  by  each 

of  four  groups  (92  dietaries  divided  on  the  basis  of  cost)  and  the 

number  of  families  using  the  most  common  articles  of  food. 


MEAT— FISH 

Beef,  uncooked 

"     cooked 

"     corned 

''     dried 

Brains,  tripe,  kidney, 

liver 

Veal 

Liver 

Lamb — mutton 

Pork 

"    cooked 

Bacon 

Salt  pork 

Sausages 

Fish,  fresh 

Canned,  pickled 

Salt, dried  and  smoked 

Smoked 

Fowl 


DAIRY  PRODUCTS 

Eggs 

Milk,  fresh 

"      condensed ... 
Cream 


CHEESE 
American .  . 
Cottage . .  . 
Cream.  .  .  . 
Neufchatel 
Parmesan . 
Roquefort . 
Swiss 


FATS 

Butter 

Lard  and  other  fats. 
Oil 


SUGAR 

Sugar 

Corn  syrup . 


Range 

of 
Prices 

per 
Pound 


Cents 

12-32 
36-70 
10-14 
34-60 

8-15 
16-40 

10-36 
10-30 
23-40 
20-40 
15-24 
15-40 

4-25 
10-36 

9-26 
18-80 
15-28 


25-60* 
6-1  If 
10-16 

10-30t 


20-28 
9-12 

38-40 
20 

50-54 

40-44 
40 


30-48 
12-20 
14-60 


5-  8 

6-  7 


Group  I 

Spending 
19.2  Cents 
per  Man 
per  Day 


No. 

of 

Times 

Used 


3 
6 

'7 
9 

6 
3 
2 

18 
8 

10 


19 

20 

6 

4 


21 
7 
4 


Aver- 
age 
Price 
Paid 


Cents 

19.4 
39.0 
10,14 


13 
19 

18 
22 

27 
16 
16,22 
8 
19 
16 

18 


28* 
6t 
11.5 
10.5  J 


23 
9 

20 
50 

40 


40 

16 

14,44 


Group  II 

Spending 

28.2  Cents 

per  Man 

per  Day 


No. 

of 

Times 

Used 


17 
5 
7 
5 

10 
13 
4 
6 
4 
9 


23 

22 

4 

3 


10 

5 
4 

2 

1 


21 

13 

6 


Aver- 
age 
Price 
Paid 


Cents 

20 
40,60 

60 

11 
21 

19^5 
18.0 
25.0 

26 

18 

24 

12 

23 

14 

27 

19 


32* 
8t 
13 
15t 


22 
10 
40 

52 

40 


38 

15 

21,42 


Group  III 

Spending 

34.7  Cents 

per  Man 

per  Day 


No. 

of 

Times 

Used 


23 
4 


3 

7 

9 
17 

8 
7 
3 

12 
5 
4 
1 
6 


21 

23 
7 
1 


20 

12 

5 


Aver- 
age 
Price 
Paid 


Cents 

21 
40 

35 

10 
24 

2L8 
21 
38 
29 
17 
23 
11 
23 
23 
24 
20 


34* 
8t 
14 
20t 


29 
10 
39 
20 
50 

40 


39 
15 

22,38 


Group  IV 

Spending 

49.4  Cents 

per  Man 

per  Day 


No. 

of 

Times 

Used 


2 
5 
1 

14 

17 
8 

11 
2 
8 

16 
8 
4 
6 

12 


23 

23 

4 

10 


23 

13 

9 


23 
2 


Aver- 
age 
Price 
Paid 


Cents 

24 
40,70 

34 

12 
29 
30 
21 
20 
40 
28 
18,24 
25 
19 
24 
12 
53 
21 


43* 
9t 
11 
20t 


25 
10 
40 
20 
52 
40,44 
40 


39 

18 

32,50 


6 
6,7 


*  Price  per  dozen,     t  Price  psr  quart,     t  Price  per  pint. 

28 


TABLE  v.— Continued 


APPENDIX 


Range 

of 
Prices 

per 
Pound 


Group  I 

Spending 
19.2  Cents 
per  Man 
per  Day 


No. 

of 

Times 

Used 


Aver- 
age 
Price 
Paid 


Group  II 

Spending 

28.2  Cents 

per  Man 

per  Day 


No. 

of 

Times 

Used 


Aver- 
age 
Price 
Paid 


Group  III 

Spending 

34.7  Cents 

per  Man 

per  Day 


No. 

of 

Times 

Used 


Aver- 
age 
Price 
Paid 


Group  IV 

Sf)ending 

49.4  Cents 

per  Man 

per  Day 


No. 

of 

Times 

Used 


Aver- 
age 
Price 
Paid 


GRAIN  PRODUCTS 


Barley 

Bread,  white 

Rolls 

Cake  and  cookies . 

Crackers 

Cornflakes 

Cornmeal 

Farina 

Flour 

Macaroni 

Oatmeal 

Rice 


VEGETABLES 
Beans,  dry 

"       fresh 

"       string 

Beets 

Cabbage 

Carrots 

Celery 

Corn,  canned 

Lentils 

Lettuce 

Onions 

Peas,  canned 

"     dried 

"     fresh 

Potatoes,  sweet.  .  . 
"         white.  .  . 

Spinach 

Tomatoes,  canned. 

fresh... 

Turnips 


FRUIT 

Apples 

Bananas 

Currants,  dry. 

Dates 

Figs 

Grapes 

Grapefruit 

Jam 

Jelly 


Cents 

6-10 
4-10 
7-16 
8-50 
9-40 
15-25 
3-10 
5-12 
4-  6 
6-20 
5-12 
6-10 


5-10 
6-15 
5-10 
2-  4 
1-  5 
2-10 
5-22 
6-12 
7-  9 
5-40 

1-  8 
5-17 
6-12 
3-12 

2-  5 

1-  4 
2-10 
4-15 
2-20 

2-  5 


1-12 

3-  8 

10-13 

10-20 

15-20 

4-28 

4-10 

18-30 

10-20 


Cents 

8 

5 

9 
17 
22 


4.4 
8 
6 


9 
6,9 

'2 
2 
3 


15 
2.1 


2 

1.6 

7,10 

5 
4 
2 


2.6 
4 


24 
10 


8 
2 

'4 
4 
5 
2 
3 
1 
7 

19 
3 
3 

6 
23 
3 
7 
6 
3 


Cents 

8 

6 
11 
15 
12 
25 

3 

10 
4.4 
10 

5 

9 


2.7 
2.7 
2.6 

5 
10 

7 
15 

3 


8 

6 

8.6 

4 

3 

1 

2.5 

4 

1.5 

22 

4 

5 

8 

13 

5 

5 

2 

2 

2.7 

17 

5.5 

6 

10.13 

10 

1 

20 

8 

2 

3 

24 

3 

12 

2 

22 

11 

12 

13 

3 

2 

2 

16 

9 

13 

11 


Cents 

8 

6 

9 

14 

10 

15 

3 

9 

4.6 

10 

7 

9 


8 
7,8 

6 
2.6 

3 

4 
11 

9 

9 
15 
2.5 
8.5 
8.0 

7 

3 

2 

8 

6 

8 
2.5,5 


2.9 
4 

10 

7 

18 
12 


2 

22 

15 

21 

10 

5 

6 

6 

21 

11 

14 

16 


16 
4 
3 
6 
11 
10 
9 
8 
1 

13 
13 
6 
3 
2 
9 
23 
2 

5 
4 


Cents 

9 

7 

9 

16 

16 

19 

6 

9 

4 

10 

7 

8 


8 
12 

7 
2.5 

3 

3 
11 
10 

7 
18 

5 
12 

8 
6,12 

3 

2 
5,7 

7 

9 
2.5 


6 

6 

10 

20 

15,20 

14 

6 
25 
15 


29 


TABLE  v.— Continued 


APPENDIX 


Range 

of 

Prices 

per 

Pound 

Group  I 

Spending 
19.2  Cents 
per  Man 
per  Day 

Group  II 

Spending 

28.2  Cents 

per  Man 

per  Day 

Group  III 

Spending 

34.7  Cents 

per  INIan 

per  Day 

Group  IV 

Spending 

49.4  Cents 

per  Man 

per  Day 

No. 

of 

Times 

Used 

Aver- 
age 
Price 
Paid 

No. 

of 

Times 

Used 

Aver- 
age 
Price 
Paid 

No. 

of 

Times 

Used 

Aver- 
age 
Price 
Paid 

No. 
•of 
Times 

Used 

Aver- 
age 
Price 
Paid 

YKVIT— Continued 
Oranges 

Cents 

3-25 
8-16 
6-16 
4-25 
5-  8 
10-16 

16 

20 
18-24 
20-80 
20-45 
20-80 

2 

1 
3 
5 
1 
2 

4 
15 
15 

Cents 

3,6 

8 
8 
5 
8 
12,16 

27 
26 
36 

13 
2 
2 
3 
1 
6 

4 
14 
19 
15 

Cents 

8 
8 
6,8 
6 
5 
12 

24 

32 
27 
44 

12 
3 
4 
4 
1 
3 

'7 
18 
15 

Cents 

8 
12 

7 

5 

6 
12 

16 

42 
29 

45 

17 
5 
4 
2 

8 

"3 
7 

14 
21 
20 

Cents 
7 

Peaches,  canned 

fresh 

Pears 

9.5 

7 

5,25 

Plums                         .    . 

Raisins                          .  . 

14 

NUTS 

Filberts 

Peanuts     

20 

Walnuts 

22 

Cocoa  and  chocolate 

Coffee 

35 
30 

Tea 

52 

Table  VI.— Percentage  composition  of  foods  analyzed  in  connection 

with  the  dietary  study  and  metabolism  experiments. 

(Figures  given  are  on  edible  portion.) 


Carbo- 

Pro- 

hy- 

Mois- 

tein 

Fat 

drate 

Total 

CaO 

Ca 

PoO, 

P 

Fe 

ture 

(Nx 
6.25) 

(By 
Differ- 
ence) 

Ash 

MEAT 

Per 

Per 

Per 

Per 

Per 

Per 

Per 

Per 

Per 

Per 

Beef,  lean,  round 

cent 

cent 

cent 

cent 

cent 

cent 

cent 

cent 

cent 

cent 

(free  from  visi- 

ble fat) 

20.55 

0.015 

0.011 

0.443 

0.193 

Beef  liver 

67.87 

20.84 

4.74 

1.13 

0.008 

0.006 

0.927 

0.405 

Fowl 

75.04 
68.40 

21.46 
18.85 

3.00 

4.57 

0.96 

7.35 

0.029 
0.043 

0.021 
0.031 

0.473 
0.385 

0.207 
0.168 

Ham,  smoked .... 

Mutton  chops 

74.90 

19.31 

4.38 

1.17 

0.023 

0.016 

0.547 

0.239 

FISH 

Blue 

77.34 

20.45 

0.76 

0.34 

1.11 

0.032 

0.023 

0.483 

0.211 

Cod,  fresh 

80.67 

18.22 

0.15 

1.12 

0.014 

0.010 

0.465 

0.203 

Halibut              .    . 

.0007 

Herring,  fresh 

.0016 

Mackerel 

66.91 

20.34 

12.45 

1.35 

0.015 

0.011 

0.692 

0.302 

30 


APPENDIX 


TABLE  VI.— Continued 


Mois- 
ture 


FISH 

{Continued) 

Perch 

Porgies 

Salmon,  canned 

fresh.. 

Tuna,  canned.  . 

White,  smoked. 

Lobster,  canned.  . 
Oysters 

CHEESE 

American 

Cottage 

Parmesan 

Swiss 

DAIRY 
PRODUCTS 

Milk 

Cream  (31%  fat) 
Butter 


Per 

cent 


79.10 
59.12 
69.94 
60.67 
68.20 


GRAIN 

PRODUCTS 
Bread,   Boston 

brown 

Bread,  Graham. . . 

"       entire 

wheat 

Bread,  rye 

"       white 

Bran 

Buckwheat 

Cornflakes 

Cornstarch 

Cream  of  Wheat. 

Farina 

Flour,  graham. . 

"      rye 

"      white .... 

"      entire 

wheat 

Force. 

Macaroni 

Pretzels 

Shredded  Wheat. 
Tapioca — sago .  . 
Wafers — cheese. . 
Fig  Newtons .... 
Social  Teas 


Pro- 
tein 
(Nx 
6.25) 


72.68 
24.85 
29.93 


30:85 


32.44 


12.20 

10.90 

9.64 

12.47 


5.95 
11.18 
10.29 

11.60 
7.05 

11.50 
5.66 


Fat 


Carbo- 
hy- 
drate 
(By 
Differ 
ence) 


Per 

cent 


18.25 
23.20 
20.90 
26.60 
20.86 


28.32 
21.34 
34.86 
30.85 


3.11 
0.59 

5.97 


8.72 
9.22 


0.47 
11.84 
11.34 

11.03 


9.61 
12.67 
10.97 
11.12 

0.20 
14.90 

4.16 

6.50 


Per 

cent 


1.74 
16.23 

7.86 
11.35 

7.30 


Per 

cent 


0.21 


0.48 
28.86 
31.95 


6.29 


0.28 


0.41 
1.12 
1.23 

1.72 


1.13 
0.64 
0.37 

0.23 

12.20 

4.69 

9.94 


Total 
Ash 


4.22 
5.48 

2.87 


Per 

cent 


1.26 
1.93 
1.09 
2.16 
3.70 


53.98 


56.50 


86.72 

75.78 


81.32 
74.82 
73.51 

87.71 
63.25 
78.47 
76.87 


CaO 


1.28 
5.95 
4.40 


Ca 


2.92 


2.06 


0.20 
0.36 


2.00 
0.69 
4.86 

0.26 
2.60 
1.18 
1.03 


Per 

cent 


0.076 
0.019 
0.023 
0.009 
0.031 

0.096 


1.184 
0.140 
1.540 
1.520 


0.166 
0.144 
0.019 


0.180 

0.045 

0.033 
0.029 


0.025 
0.030 

0.057 
0.035 


0.030 

0.058 
0.024 
0.474* 
0.1121 


Per 

cent 


0.054 
0.014 
0.016 
0.006 


P.O, 


Per 

cent 


0.536 
0.531 
0.589 
0.831 


0.022     0.62 


0.069 


0.846 
0.100 
1.101 
1.086 


0.119 
0.082 
0.014 


0.129 

0.032 

0.024 
0.021 


0.018 
0.021 

0.041 
0.025 


0.022 

0.041 
0.017 
0.339- 
().()80t 


1.392 
0.747 
2.001 
1.860 


0.213 
0.040 

0.465 


0.338 
0.201 

0.053 
0.112 
0.133 
0.355 
0.286 
0.833 
0.590 


0.707 
0.856 
0.344 
0.469 
0.740 
0.207 
0.720 
0.254 
0.362 


Per 

cent 


0.234 
0.232 
0.257 
0.363 
0.274 


0.608 
0.326 
0.874 
0.812 


0.093 
0.018 

0.203 


0.148 
0.088 

0.231 
0.049 
0.058 
0.155 
0.125 
0.364 
0.258 


0.309 
0.374 
0.150 
0.205 
0.323 
0.090 
0.314 
0.111 
0.158 


Per 

cent 

.0014 


.0081 


0013 


.0012 


.0003 


.0114 
.0011 


.0008 
.0008 
.0036 
.0011 
.0007 

.0035 

.0011 

.0042 
.0016 


*^d^ulated  from  the  protein  in  cheese  and  crackers. 
t  Calculated  from  the  protein  in  figs  and  crackers. 

31 


TABLE  .VI.— Continued 


APPENDIX 


Mois- 
ture 


Pro- 
tein 

(Nx 
6.25) 


Fat 


Carbo 
hy- 
drate 
(By 
Differ 
ence) 


Total 
Ash 


CaO 


Ca 


P«0, 


SUGAR 

Sugar,  brown  (mo 

lasses)  

Corn  syrup 

Maple  syrup. .  .  . 

MOLASSES 

Barbadoes 

New  Orleans .... 
Porto  Rican .... 


Per 

cent 

4.90 


VEGETABLES 
Artichokes,French 
Beans,  dry,  lima 
"       fresh, 

string 

Brussels  sprouts. 

Carrots 

Cauliflower 

Cucumbers 

Egg  plant 

Kohlrabi 

Parsnips 

Peas,  dry 

Peppers,  green .  . 
Potatoes,  sweet.. 

Rhubarb 

Tomatoes 


FRUIT 

Apples 

Bananas 

Grapefruit 

Grape  juice,  I. . . 

"      II.. 

Grapes,  Tokay*. 

"       Concord* 

Orange  juice .... 


JELLY 
(Commercial) 

Currant 

Strawberry 

NUTS 

Almondsf 

Peanuts 

Peanut  butter . . 
Pecans 


MISCEL- 
LANEOUS 
Coffee  infusion. 
Gelatine 


82.80 


93.04 


94.20 


79.90 


6.11 


Per 

cent 

0.20 


3.41 


1.03 


24.56 
0.73 


0.19 


0.43 
0.28 


0.62 


29.81 
11.28 

0.12 


Per 

cent 


0.51 


0.11 


0.10 


0.07 


70.62 


Per 

cent 

93.50 


11.97 


5.34 


4.59 


10.37 


Per 

cent 

1.40 


1.28 


0.38 


1.62 


Per 

cent 

0.107 
0.072 
0.156 


Per 

cent 

0.076 
0.051 
0.112 


0.043  0.245 
0.520  0.372 
0.730    0.522 


0.057 
0.085 


0.044 


0.49    0.016 


0.076 
0.008 


0.009 


0.013 
0.018 


0.016 


0.020 
0.018 

0.300 

0.060 
0.121 


0.002 
0.350 


0.041 
0.061 


0.031 


0.011 


0.054 
0.006 


0.006 


0.009 
0.013 


0.011 


0.014 
0.013 

0.214 

0.043 
0.086 


0.001 
0.250 


Per 

cent 

0.085 
0.025 
0.002 

0.114 
0.128 
0.127 

0.228 


0.078 


0.874 
0.060 


0.025 


0.028 
0.020 


0.045 


0.019 
0.018 

1.071 
0.825 
0.820 
0.767 


0.007 


Per 

cent 

•0.037 
0.011 
0.001 

0.050 
0.056 
0.055 

0.100 


0.260    0.114 


0.034 


0.382 
0.026 


0.011 


0.012 
0.009 


0.020 


0.008 
0.008 

0.468 
0.360 
0.358 
0.335 


0.003 


*  Tokay  grapes  analyzed  with  skins;  Concord  without  skii 
t  Almonds  were  not  blanched. 

32 


Additional  copies  of  this  publication  may  be  obtained 
from  the  New  York  Association  for  Improving  the 
Condition  of  the  Poor,  105  East  22nd  Street,  New  lork 
City,  at  25  cents  per  copy. 


RETURN     CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 
TO--^      202  Main  Library 

LOAN  PERIOD  1 
^     HOME  USE 

2                      : 

3 

4 

5                                ( 

b 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

Renewals  and  Recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  the  due  date. 

Books  may  be  Renewed  by  calling     642-3405. 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 

J0L21W- 

r 

RECEIYED  &\ 

f 

JUL  fi  1986 

QRCUUTION  DEPl 

• 

j 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 

FORM  NO.  DD6,                               BERKELEY,  CA  94720 

PS         r 

GENERAL  LIBRARY  -  U.C.  BERKELEY 


^C^^uns 


BODDflblMMki 


